Go to Otherpower.com Home Page Go to Forcefield Shopping Cart Go to Wondermagnet.com Home Page
Front Page - [Homebrewed Electricity-- (wind) (solar) (hydro) (steam) (controls) (storage) (mechanical)] - Classifieds - Site News
Everything - Newbies - [Remote Living-- (housing) (heat) (light) (water)] - Reviews - Diaries - Our Products
A Different VAWT design


By Dr Robert, Section Wind
Posted on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 09:04:44 AM MST
My first 5 tries at making a low wind VAWT were not too good.  But #6 and  #7 were more related to a water turbine.

 
I was recently introduced to Vertical Axis Wind Turbines (VAWTs) designs and I was definitely interested. Many bum steers later I came up with Prototype #7.  It looked like a one cup Pelton Wheel on the inside but the outside was a Kaplan low head water turbine derivative!
   The Pelton Turbine originally used nozzles to direct a high pressure streams of water directly into cups.  I figured that if it worked for water, why not air somehow? Its the same thing  except that water is 600 times more dense than air, right?.
    On Prototype #6, I made eighteen long "cups" out of a pair of 10' long pieces of 4" white thin wall drain pipe PVC sawn longitudinally into two 180 degree semicircle lengths. I mounted the 18 lengths, each 28.5" long to my bicycle wheels revolving testbed. I turned on a pair of squirrel cage blowers and found it worked better than the previous models, and especially good if I directed both blowers directly into the cups. Good but not good enough.  
   I like to read biographical stories about inventors, so I read more about Pelton's invention.  One day, Pelton noticed that his turbine was running faster for no apparent reason.  Opening up the turbine, he discovered that one of the nozzles had come loose and was blasting the side of the cup instead of the middle.
   This circulating motion was obviously imparting more power to the cups. I also read up on the trials and tribulations of Viktor Kaplan. He died disappointed in the performance of his invention.  After Viktor's death, others discovered how its performance could be greatly improved.  The Kaplan turbine gets its low head performance advantage from fixed blades that redirect the water directly into the rotating blades... I wondered???  In a hurry to try out an idea, I cut  more  4" drainpipe PVC into eighteen 33.5" lengths of 90 degree quarter circles.  I held these 90 degree pieces just outside of the arc subtended by the blades in #6, by inserting them into some scrap 2" styrofoam that I had lying around from another project.
   Then I turned the squirrel cage blowers back on.  WOW!!! The free running #7 was turning at triple the RPMs compared with #6 without the 90 degree pieces. It was  Like what happened to Pelton. and it would start to run in a 1 MPH wind, not stopping until the wind dropped below 1/2 MPH.
   It was time for theory to catch up with reality. When you look at a top down or bottom up 2D CAD view of VAWT #7, the answer becomes apparent. The 90 degree fixed pieces of PVC were acting like wind Circulators. They were redirecting the flow of the air 90 degrees.  When the air exited the circulators, the upwind circulator air streams ran into the incoming air imparting a slight inward vector, resulting in a circulating stream of air significantly higher in velocity.  This air ran into the inside edge of the 180 degree blades and wrapped around this inside edge imparting more energy just like Pelton had discovered.  Looking at the 2D Cad model some more, the circulators on the windward side were not only blocking the wind from hitting the returning blades, but they were vectoring this blocked wind towards the powered side adding to the powered force.  Because the circulators were effectively operating at a wider diameter than the blades themselves, they were acting like airscoops and were producing a venturi effect, giving the air another push in velocity.  The downwind side circulators were also helping because they were causing a partial vacuum to appear on the  exit point when the circulators forced a rapid expansion of the air when it exited the circulators.
   Whew!  At least that's what I think is making #7 look so good. To speed test, I have taken #7 on its 4' by 4' trailer out for a Spin (pun intended) on the local highway.  Going down hill towards Denver, it looks like it is turning almost supersonic.  In spite of the very light temporary construction used, there is no damage whatsoever caused by towing behind my car in the highly turbulent 55 mph wind. I tell the curious that it is part of an alien space ship. Keep watching along the highway for the rest of the space ship to come along soon.

From a distance the unit looks like a small round Carrier Air Conditioner, except it makes no noise even in a 55 MPH wind.  It looks critter friendly especially when I put the wind screening cover over it soon.  The wind screen will be made from perforated metal mesh used on old TVRO dishes.  When a high velocity wind hits this perforated metal mesh, it dams up the holes and will vector around the VAWT, automatically saving the VAWT from high wind damage.  

(I have also sent along 3 pictures but don't know how to attach them)

Robert

A Different VAWT design | 45 comments (45 topical)

Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#1)
by hiker on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 02:30:18 AM MST

http://www.otherpower.com/images/scimages/9395/Blades_Circulators_640res.jpg

http://www.otherpower.com/images/scimages/9395/AlibreVAWT_640.jpg

here you go--third one doesnt want to load.................
WILD IN ALASKA



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#2)
by hiker on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 02:59:56 AM MST

here it is.............................

           


WILD IN ALASKA
[ Parent ]



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#3)
by thefinis on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 05:45:15 AM MST

Good luck looks good but now the question is does it make power. Keep us posted.

Finis
Texas born and bred



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#4)
by Volvo farmer on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 05:51:05 AM MST

That thing might have enough swept area to win my challenge. Pretty easy to simulate a 20MPH wind on that trailer too. I'd be interested in seeing an alternator attached to it.

Volvo Farmer


[ Parent ]



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#5)
by electrondady1 on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 06:30:05 AM MST

dr. robert
congratulations on building a very interesting design.
a 300% jump in rpm using the stationary vanes is remarkable.
it looks stable and could easily be made modular.
the stationary exterior vanes, visually obscuring the rotating section makes it
quite suitable for urban use.
thanks for posting.  

[ Parent ]


Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#11)
by Dr Robert on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 01:46:52 PM MST

It only takes a day or two to make. See if I am not telling the truth!  I demonstrated this VAWT at a Conifer, Colorado town meeting recently. One of the County Commissioners liked the benign appearance and quietness so well that she invited me to go with her to the county zoning department, to get a blanket type approval, hopefully.

[ Parent ]


Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#10)
by Dr Robert on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 01:31:25 PM MST

ME TOO!  I am working on the alternator section now and next will be the energy accumulator section.  I think the excellent recent work by Hugh Piggott on "axial flow alternators" is exactly what I want to attach to this VAWT. As one of my main constraints, I want the VAWT to set a path to recycling of landfill bound items.  This in mind, I am accumulating obsolete low density 3 1/2" hard drive magnets for use in a "Cheapskate's axial flow alternator."
The VAWT naturally falls into 4 parts.  The inner turbine, the outer circulators, the alternator/generator, and the energy accumulator (more about this at a later date).   By lifting the circulator assembly off the turbine section and replacing it with another circulator  that used 6" drain pipe PVC (Home Depot) or some very old furnace round ~ 10" ducting, or even a 55 gallon drum cut lengthwise into 1/4 sections you can increase the power should conditions warrant.   If you find the VAWT has more capability than anticipated, add another alternator section at the topside of the turbine.  While I favor the Pelton wheel idea, I think that if a circulator was lowered (built) around all the other types of VAWTs like a Savonius or even a Lenz or a Darrieus (shudder) they would perform better.

Robert

[ Parent ]



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#13)
by fcfcfc on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 02:03:23 PM MST

Hi: Well I have to say my alt design is not using scrap stuff but will cost more than 1K just for the magnets. I have a very specific set of goals in mind for it, 1T or better flux on a 5/8" gap, 75" per second or more on the wire cut speed at 1RPS and trying to keep the weight down to one person liftability. Basically I want usable power at .25 RPS or better. The volatge will be very high because I would like to tie it to a grid tie inverter. I don't want gearing so as not to waste the energy in my very low wind spot (every watt counts). A lot of the guys here (this site) think people like me are nuts for trying to get wind but it is very hard for them to appreciate the value of water (here in the desert) when they live on fresh water lakes, so to speak. But that is a whole other discussion. Anyway, if you get a good rpm reading at any known wind speed, please post along with the exact outer diameter of the inside spinning turbine.

[ Parent ]


Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#14)
by fcfcfc on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 02:11:12 PM MST

Hi again: I bet I might have an inkling as to what the accumulator might be... Does it involve a watch spring spiral kind of thing between the turbine rotating shaft and the gen shaft..??..

[ Parent ]


Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#18)
by vawtman on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 04:56:06 PM MST

Hi Doc
 Darrius(shudder)Lol
 One thing you need to know is if you block the rotor with too many blades(high solidity)in my opinion the swept area that power could be harvested is much lower.

 You need to let the wind blow through the turbine and use its rpm to shut down the flow.That would be the power you harvest.

 In my humble opnion from different contraptions i tried.

 Best of luck to you now and in the future and i probably dont make any sense.

[ Parent ]



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#6)
by wdyasq on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 07:41:10 AM MST

It will be interesting to see if it actually produces power.

Ron
Adventure is just bad planning." -- Roald Amundsen



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#7)
by finnsawyer on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 08:47:38 AM MST

"I figured that if it worked for water, why not air somehow? Its the same thing  except that water is 600 times more dense than air, right?."

It's not the same.  The water only has to push the light air aside, while the air has to push the heavy (from its perspective) air aside.  People tend to forget that air powered systems are operating in an ocean of air and that that ocean of air has mass and inertia too.
GeoM



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#9)
by Dr Robert on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 12:36:54 PM MST

You are quite right in what you say.  I was being a little witty there to get people to react.  I have been planning to see exactly what the effect might be if  I were to do a 3 dimensional scale down of the Vertical Axis Wind Turbine (VAWT) into a Vertical Axis Water Turbine (VA WaWa T ?) for use in small streams. What do you think?

Robert  

[ Parent ]



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#25)
by finnsawyer on Thu Dec 13, 2007 at 08:45:57 AM MST

If you are placing something into the water stream you have the same issues.  In that case the water must displace or interact with the water flowing past.  I deal with the issue for air in my latest Diary.  You might give it a read.  It happens that there exist mathematical solutions for non compressible fluid flow around both a sphere and a long cylinder.  When one investigates the solutions one finds that the speed up of the fluid around the objects results in an increase in power flow over a certain range of radius due to energy being taken from the pressure field.  This effect is greatest at the 90 degree angle measured from the point of greatest pressure (where the air flow is zero).  While the solutions may fail downstream due to turbulence such as cavitation, they should be good to the 90 degree point.  I have suggested in the past using a hemispherical nose cone on a wind turbine to take advantage of this effect.  The model for the physics given in the Diary change this picture, since the nose cone will be added to an existing pressure field.  I'm not sure how to deal with this change.  I also had an idea how to use the flow around the cylinder, but it looks like that one is dead.  To operate effectively the turbine must have a lower pressure air flow past it.  My design would have had a higher pressure flow past the turbine.

One last thing.  Maybe two years ago there was a comment about a structure to channel the flow of water to a generating system on a river in Germany that the author claimed was as effective as a nearby dam.  I'm sorry but I don't have a link to it.  Personally, I think you would be better off going to a regular water wheel with only the paddles in the water.  
GeoM
[ Parent ]



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#39)
by Dr Robert on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:55:48 AM MST

I appreciate your ideas.  I do want to get into the water stream at some future time, but right now air is in.....

I am wondering whether a more of a French curve ( start the curve gradually, then tighten as the air reaches  90 degrees)  might work better for air than just a simple 90 degree turn. I want to try this at some point when I get more instrumentation on the VAWT.  What do you think?

[ Parent ]



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#42)
by binarycortex on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 03:18:16 PM MST

There is a public company that is using this design but is using french curves, check out this link. http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Gual_Industrie_StatoEolien_Vertical-Axis_Wind_Turbine

[ Parent ]


Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#12)
by Ungrounded Lightning Rod on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 02:01:00 PM MST

More importantly:  Air is compressible and water is not.  Very different fluid dynamics.

Which is not to say that water wheel designs can't provide insights applicable to air turbine designs.  But compressibility means some stuff doesn't transfer well at all and other stuff needs compensation.

[ Parent ]



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#16)
by Dr Robert on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 02:32:26 PM MST

I totally agree. When we all did that first bellyflopper as a kid, we learned an instant lesson on the incompressability of water. But it was way ahead of hitting the diving board or the shoreline.  I want to think about this on Prototype #17 , maybe prototype 9? when I want to add an inner set of blades.  Pelton water wheels use a double bucket design but I think that a better wind design would provide a air channel backflow between the buckets (180 degree blades).   How would you do (or not do) a second blade system?

Robert

[ Parent ]



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#8)
by fcfcfc on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 12:32:58 PM MST

Hi: Very interesting... and yes stackable (modular as suggested). Looking at the layout it looks like it should be able to achieve greater than 1 TSR without sacrificing torque, but adding to it. I would love to see RPM's at a given wind speed so that TSR comp can be precisely made. If you can show a TSR better than 1.5, I would favor your design for my future VAWT over the helix design even with 4 airfoil baffles at 90 degs.. (similar concept altering pressure areas). I would be extremely interested in any data coming out of this. It might make a great match for my low RPM gen I am planning to build on this whole project.



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#15)
by Dr Robert on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 02:11:38 PM MST

As I stated in a response above, if it doesn't perform to your expectations, just build another circulator section.  I always claim that a perfectly running prototype is 1% of the effort done!   Prototype #7 is maybe at the 1/2% mark.  I am interested in your low RPM generator ideas.  Tell me more.    Right now #7 turns in extremely low (1 MPH) wind.  My goal is to capture energy at <5 MPH.  A unit still to be designed to handle this amount of low energy I call an energy accumulator (to be discussed later).

On the way home from Denver the other day I was doing 55 MPH into a 30 MPH headwind. #7 lost two circulator blades somewhere on US 285, but it kept right on spinning much to fast to count perhaps in the 500 RPM category.  It will be fully instrumented when the axial flow alternator is added at the bottom.

Robert

[ Parent ]



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#19)
by fcfcfc on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 08:21:14 PM MST

Hi: The below links will give you an idea of the gen I am working on....
To where I am now as to where I began is quite a difference, allot of thoughts, testing, more thoughts etc.. The gen will most likely be concentric rings rather than the disk style for a number of reasons. The stator still remains a bear to build. Still trying to refine wire size and number of cuts... It really depends on if I can find a turbine design that will passively cut off at about 40MPH so excessive currents in the stator can be avoided in storms. An electronic solution may also work, a loading scheme in the inverter that will only load to a certain current level despite voltage increases. Allot of work still to due before I actually start on the "real thing".

http://www.fieldlines.com/story/2007/12/7/232131/157
http://www.fieldlines.com/story/2007/11/30/0312/9434
http://www.fieldlines.com/story/2007/11/1/2392/41786
http://www.fieldlines.com/story/2007/10/6/165423/878
http://www.fieldlines.com/story/2007/10/4/1749/09999

[ Parent ]



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#27)
by thefinis on Thu Dec 13, 2007 at 09:07:54 PM MST

While a vawt fan(pun intended) there are some real drawbacks in trying to design low wind speed turbines. The biggest is that there just isn't any real power in the <5 mph winds. The next is that low wind speeds tend to yield low rpms and with most vawts low rpms is already an issue so you are just compounding a problem. What most builders here have found is that you would do well to build around the wind speed that in your area delivers the most power over the course of a year. Mainly you try to survive through the high winds and out wait the low/no wind times.

The design still looks good but do the math (swept area X available power @ <5 wind X efficiency) before trying to design for output in the <5 mph winds.

Finis
Texas born and bred
[ Parent ]



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#17)
by CmeBREW on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 04:26:26 PM MST

Hello Dr Robert.

      That looks like a very interesting design. I was flippin around designs similar to that earlier in the summer but with the blade angles I started out with on my vawt, it looked like it would just 'air brake'.(and it would have)
 But now that I completely change my angles that idea like yours makes perfect sense.

 I  never thought about using the pvc for the 'circulator' though. Thanks for that idea! It would be fairly simple. I will certainly try that real soon. It looks like it would 'out smart' the wind on the opposing side of the rotor to a nice degree I think. Which is the obvious most difficult thing to do!
Can't wait to see what power you can get out of it.

 -Good luck and Thanks for sharing that.




Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#20)
by Tritium on Wed Dec 12, 2007 at 09:32:18 PM MST

Since I haven't seen any water turbines my first impression was that this mill style shares some design elements with a jet turbine fan assembly.  

Thurmond



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#29)
by Ungrounded Lightning Rod on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 12:18:34 AM MST

Jet engine blades are lift-type airfoils.

I have a couple here.  Souveniers of a project I worked, where I wrote machine-tool motion software for an EDM tool that cut a strain-relief slot between the blades of a multi-blade casting.

[ Parent ]



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#21)
by spinner on Thu Dec 13, 2007 at 02:58:19 AM MST

congrats on the progress!
VAWTS are fun!
spinner



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#22)
by obelix on Thu Dec 13, 2007 at 03:53:08 AM MST

Hello

Just a link to an industrial design:
http://www.gual-industrie.com/English/defaultang.html

Regards



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#23)
by fcfcfc on Thu Dec 13, 2007 at 05:19:23 AM MST

Hi: Looks like they have it pretty much nailed down. Now that I looked at that site, I think I saw this one before. You look at so many designs and styles, they sort of all blend in after while... I sent them an email asking them about their non-loaded TSR. It will be interesting to see if they respond...

[ Parent ]


Taking a look (3.00 / 0) (#24)
by wdyasq on Thu Dec 13, 2007 at 08:15:13 AM MST

I'm extremely doubtful of VAWT designs. So, I went to the site and looked over everything I could find.

The small unit has a swept area of ~65SF. This compares to a HAWT with blades ~9' long. At the rated speed, 34mph (~91,342 Furlongs/Fortnight) a HAWT will put out ~2kW. This machine claims 1.5kW, so far, believable.

The machine speed is slow. They use a geared generator and what I think relates to an MPPT. It appears this would work but will eat some power. No comment here, just a few facts.

Construction is folded aluminum and steel. Electrochemical corrosion may become a problem. If it does, it will be where the aluminum and steel members meet and will take a while to exhaust the effects of the zinc galvanizing.

The thing weighs 800kg/1700lb. It will not be inexpensive to produce and install.

End result, is it practical? I doubt it. The expense of building and installing will probably be in the neighborhood of Solar PV for similar output.

I would love to be proven wrong.

Ron
Adventure is just bad planning." -- Roald Amundsen
[ Parent ]



Re: Taking a look (3.00 / 0) (#26)
by fcfcfc on Thu Dec 13, 2007 at 10:09:42 AM MST

Hi: When I was out there I did the same thing when I was looking for a non loaded TSR. I would agree with all your conclusions. It surprised me they went with a geared alt rather than a high eff direct drv PM. The thing I wrestle with is the turbine design for my location. I need something that I can start at the top of my roof but at least gets up there 20' more than that. Their implementation of the design is low and squatty, so you really are stuck with real ground wind. In the right location that my not be a problem, no trees, no buildings to speak etc., but I need to get up to 40' at the top to try and tap some of that better air, at least a little. The weight is surprising though, I thought it came in a bit heavy. I can not help wondering what a regular helix with a 360 twist would do inside the vane cage... Also I wonder what would happen if you took a standard roof top vent turbine and opened up the top of the unit. You mount the turbine base to be still on the Styrofoam with the hole in the styro which goes to the inside. For his foam job, lets say a 24" vent turbine. Now when the wind blows and the vent spins, a vacuum is created on the inside of the whole turbine. That size turbine will move 2350 CFM in only a 4MPH breeze. That is 40 cubic feet per second. Such a negative pressure would cause the air to accelerate inward more all the way around the unit, and from a cost perspective your using a relatively cheap standard item. ...just a thought..

[ Parent ]


Re: Taking a look (3.00 / 0) (#28)
by Volvo farmer on Thu Dec 13, 2007 at 09:40:22 PM MST

This concept interests me. I have no great knowledge of VAWTs, yet one thing confuses me.

I have seen twice in this thread, queries about TSR of unloaded turbines. I completely fail to understand why TSR of an unloaded turbine would be of interest to anyone. I thought the idea was to make some power from the wind here. My kids have pinwheels which spin in the wind and provide moderate entertainment value, I'm sure they have a TSR as well.

Maybe I just don't understand VAWTs much. Can someone explain to me why TSR of an unloaded turbine is a valuable data point to someone who is actually trying to make electricity from the wind?

Volvo Farmer


[ Parent ]



Re: Taking a look (3.00 / 0) (#31)
by electrondady1 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 08:41:33 AM MST

my understanding is that in a drag type vawt,
the "tip speed ratio" is 1 at best.
that's the very reason i like them !
(non threatening in an urban setting)

using an air foil profile as in a darius or H rotor or lenz2,
 will result in lift and greater speeds in relation to the actual wind speed.

dr. roberts has claimed a 300%increase in rpm ,
due to the stationary vanes on the exterior of his rotor.

but we don't know what rpm it could do  with out the extra vanes.
what would be handy is an actual rpm reading in a given wind
using just his inner rotor .
it would then be possible to judge it's "efficiency" and compare it to other styles.
then ,
an rpm reading at the same wind speed  using the outer " circulators".

if a similar test could be done while measuring  torque it would give us a real insight into the benefits of his design .

i've always been a bit sceptical about these "add on" things designed to increase
  the output of what is a very simple devise.
often thy contain as much or more material than the actual mill.
and often times they restrict the vawt in reacting to changes in wind direction.

here's hoping that dr.roberts machine is a step forward in vawt design

[ Parent ]



Re: Taking a look (3.00 / 0) (#40)
by Dr Robert on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 12:32:32 PM MST

Sounds like have step on a filled behive.  

I am simply reporting what has happened here so far.  I apologize to the true scientists among you for not having precise data;  I will have it soon; but at this point I am only able to give you "appearances" which I also find a bit difficult to quantify as well.

Thanks to one and all for your interest. Especially my wife who is normally the "wet rag" in the pack, but has given me the financial go ahead to continue experimenting on this VAWT.

Robert

[ Parent ]



Re: Taking a look (3.00 / 0) (#34)
by fcfcfc on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:17:19 AM MST

Hi: In short the max TSR at no load is allot like the max stag temp of a thermal unit or the OC voltage of a given PV. Its not meant to substitute for loaded testing but it can often point the way towards designs that will yield better loaded results...

[ Parent ]


Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#30)
by dinges on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 08:24:09 AM MST



A to-scale drawing of various wind turbine configurations for identical output power.

Notice the sheer massiveness of VAWTs as compared to the elegant, slender HAWT.

Hi-res picture available here:

http://www.anotherpower.com/gallery/dinges/comp1?full=1

Peter.



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#32)
by fungus on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:12:12 AM MST

"Notice the sheer massiveness of VAWTs as compared to the elegant, slender HAWT."
Also the weight; the hawt is only 40kg but the savonious is 2.4 tonnes ! - 30 times heavier..
Never seen the 'shrouded propeller' design before?

'Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.'-Albert Einstein
Fungus - www.reenergy.co.uk
[ Parent ]


Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#33)
by electrondady1 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:39:39 AM MST

oh god,
it's the  hawt vs. vawt comparison again.
as relevant to this conversation as comparing
woman's breast size or the dimensions of a mans penis.

it is a given that a hawt is more efficient configuration
 and will produce "a bigger bang for the buck"
no one is disputing that.
 (well, perhaps windstuff ed)

is it impossible for someone interested in vawts
to be considered a reasonable individual?
that they are not deluded  or dishonest?

i have no axe to grind ,
 i just like the way they look.

[ Parent ]



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#35)
by TomW on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:19:22 AM MST

edaddy;


is it impossible for someone interested in vawts
to be considered a reasonable individual?
that they are not deluded  or dishonest?

I think that statement can be turned around, too. Mostly due to waiting for one to be installed, proven and documented over time [successfully].

Just because someone lacks the faith of the zealots must they be deemed evil and be denied the right to honest dissent? Their rights end where mine start, you know.

But, then religions seldom involve fact.

Not our fault Doc Bob came in and stirred the pot with this "breakthrough" complete with[apparently] undocumented wild claims involving a value of 300% increase. All this on his first story post. Its somewhat unreasonable for us to just buy into information from a user with absolutely no credibility earned on the board, don't you think?

Considering all it takes is an email address and an internet connection to join and post immediately, I have a healthy skepticism of wild claims from new users posting a day after they join. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Its that simple. Especially since he makes some completely inaccurate comparisons between air and water.

Fact is, I truly hope one of these proponents pulls off a good unit but until we see it we reserve the right to skeptical and critical dissection. Just how it is.

Cheers.

TomW

The Truth is the Truth, even if no one believes it; and a lie is a lie even if everyone believes it


[ Parent ]



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#36)
by dinges on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:44:30 AM MST

Electrondady, my post was mostly meant as a response to your post #31, where you stated:

"that's the very reason i like them ! (non threatening in an urban setting)"

That remark is what triggered my response with the comparison in the image. A tiny VAWT sure is non-threatening. Just as a similar-size HAWT is non-threatening (I guesstimate a .7 m diameter HAWT to be the equivalent of Dr. Robert's VAWT).

Now, build a VAWT with the same generating capacity of, say, Dan's 10-14-17-20 footers, and I doubt that same neighbourhood would find those VAWTs 'non-threatening'. That's what the image showed, the relative dimensions of VAWTs to a HAWT. Comparing apples to apples, as opposed to comparing apples to oranges. Similar size (kW) HAWT to a similar size VAWT. In fact, given the choice, I'm pretty sure what my neighbours (and I) would chose when faced between choosing a massive Savonius or that slender HAWT.

So, as a response to your 'non threatening' remark, I consider my reply with the image very relevant. I will not enter into a discussion w.r.t. the things you've accused me of in post #33 as it will carry the thread off-topic. Just let it be known that I -hate- it when people attribute things to me I did not say (deluded, irrational, dishonest, axe to grind). Those are your words, not mine.

Regards,

Drs. ing. Peter.

[ Parent ]



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#37)
by electrondady1 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:23:38 AM MST

i apologize.

[ Parent ]


Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#38)
by fcfcfc on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:41:26 AM MST

Hi Peter: I think I have seen those images posted before. And I am sure the numbers are right. The only thing I would say in comparing the HAWT shown VS the Sav. shown is that by building the Sav out rather than up you increase the weight more per equal increase in wind sweep area. What I mean is that if they had built one 4 times higher than wider rather than going for the "squat" design, it could have been built far lighter for the same structural "toughness", obtained higher RPM and averaged the same torque output with an increase in Avg efficiency. With a drag type VAWT wider is not better because you sacrifice RPM at a given wind speed where as with a HAWT you don't, at least not in the same way, simply because with a HAWT the blades are never moving away from the wind but always perp to it.

[ Parent ]


Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#41)
by spinningmagnets on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:40:45 PM MST

I am not allowed to have a wind-gen where I live, but I hope to have one when I retire.

Until somebody figures out a cheap and easy way to incorporate "variable pitch" onto the popular 3-blade PMA-HAWT, I can't imagine any way to improve it. If I ever do build one, I will exactly copy an existing proven design.

So,...I have nothing to play with for a few years, and I want to join the fun. I have read about VAWTs being used to run a 55-gal drum that agitated with an old bicycle pedal crank. It was used to wash army clothes on Pacific islands in WWII.

I have a pic of a three-drum Savonius that pumps irrigation water in a remote region. central pipe shaft, auto wheel bearing at bottom, top of shaft braced.

I can see making something similar to this new VAWT on my roof (visually unobtrusive to wife and neighbors) spinning a shaft through the roof which runs a fan that evacuates my attic. A while back I put in a thermostat-controlled 120-VAC fan in my attic. It cooled the attic enough with ambient air that my A/C cycled about half as much, saving much money (or battery Watts if I was RE).

There has to more ways we can think of to use a medium torque/low RPM shaft, that you made from free junk.

"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." - Ken Olson, President, Digital Equipment Corporation, 1977



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#43)
by Shell on Wed Sep 17, 2008 at 09:04:41 AM MST

Robert,

Very nice design using some wonderfully innovative thinking.

I noticed you're up in the Conifer area? I'm down the road from you in Pine Junction. I'm setting up a company down the road from me in a 1,600 sq ft shop calling it Solar Wind Systems. I'm just now filling it up with lathes, mills and workshop tools. Maybe we could chat sometime to exchange some ideas?

I too have a new VAWT design I want to finish and maybe get to market. It came to me a few years ago when I was designing some underwater powered equipment for Anti Submarine Warfare systems (ASW). I ended up with a entirely different blade system because the fluid dynamics of air and water are so different. It was one I never used but according to the numbers it should work quite well taking a little of each of the VAWT and HAWT operational characteristics. I like to say it will blow and suck quite well. ;-)

I'm new to this board but in just flashing through the emails it seems to be a wealth of knowledge and brilliant thinkers. I'm impressed. Good to be on board and I hope you don't mind an old engineering grandmother of 9 here...

My best,
Shell



Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#44)
by TheEquineFencer on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 03:12:38 PM MST

I see this is an old post but I figured I'd see if it still has some interest. If the top were open and you placed an airfoil like a wing at say a 30-45 degree angle at the top edge, would it increase the airspeed over the top pulling the air from the center causing it to turn faster? If this were installed with a tail so it rotated it into the wind it might increase the flow. It might make it "suck" the air out of it. Just a thought.
F. Moore Farmville, NC


Re: A Different VAWT design (3.00 / 0) (#45)
by solarwind on Thu Mar 19, 2009 at 11:25:28 PM MST

I am interested in wind power here in South Texas. The wind is a constant here but the city codes are out of touch with reality. The code here represents the bladed wind turbine everyone knows about with a tower not to exceed 110ft. on at least a 1 1/2 acre tract of land. I proposed the wind turbine much like the one I see here instead with a ten foot pole which would be in my back yard due to the constant wind year round running through my yard. No one would see it because my house is taller and it would be a great addition  with solar panels. They said "NOPE" and told me that they were redoing the code and lowering the acre size but most people here have only a 1/4 with house. I certainly don't believe they will lower it that much. They told me if the tower of 110feet was to fall there needed to be enough room for it to fall without hitting another house...hence the acreage. Mine would fall in my own yard but speaking English here with the city gets you nowhere.It seems the people who wrote up the code know very little about wind power.

I will wait and see what the new code will be. They took the wind out of my sails before I could get up and running!LOL Anyone here have simular problems?

I like the squirrel cage idea because of birds, bats,etc. seeing it as a solid object and the outer doesn't move but create a path for the wind to run threw and push against the inner cage and force it to spin at a fast rate. If the top was open like the one the french curve over seas has would it spin faster? Aluminum blades with solid wheels of steel or heavy alloy(in place of bicycle wheels)for weight when the blades spin would get a generator going (stator)like bladed wind turbines. Rare earth magnets and coils at the top or bottom of of the center would produce some useful power I bet.



A Different VAWT design | 45 comments (45 topical)
Display: Sort:
Menu
· create account
· How to use the board
· FAQs
· search the board
· Google search the board

Login
Make a new account
Username:
Password:

Total Views
  322 Scoop users have viewed this posting.

Related Links
· Scoop
· Also by Dr Robert

Powered by Scoop
You must be a registered user to post here. It's easy and free, and the link is on the upper right side of your page.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Postings are owned by the poster, but may be deleted or moved at the ADMIN's sole discretion. The Rest © 2009 Forcefield.
You can Email the board ADMIN here. PLEASE include the username you signed up with!